CPU and GPU not maxing out. More FPS?

[Ad Hominem]

When playing Far Cry 5 on ultra @ 2560x1440 my GPU and CPU are not running at max load. VRAM and system RAM are not maxed out either. Shouldn't I be able to get more FPS out of it if it's got more head room to go?

AMD FX 8350 8 core (oc to 4.4 ghz)
Nvidia Titan XP
32gb RAM @ 1866 dual channel

[Ad Hominem]

Escrito originalmente por Monk:

What FPS are you getting OP? I can disable one of my cards and check the performance later to see how it measures up if you'd like, but I am also pretty sure your CPU is holding you back at 1440p , question is how much, a higher oc could help things.

Average is 68 fps with everythng all the way up, TAA AA and motion blur off @ 1440. Lowest dip was 50 and highest spike was 90. This was on the benchmark. That would be a cool reference for me to have if you did check that for me. What CPU are you running for comparison?

Again, it's super playable at those rates but I just wonder where the ceiling is and where it should be. If it's not using up 100% of the horsepower on either CPU or GPU then what's holding it up. Gonna try to push the OC a little harder but every time I've tried it gets super unstable even with more voltage.

[Elon Mosque]

Escrito originalmente por Ad Hominem:

Escrito originalmente por Monk:

What FPS are you getting OP? I can disable one of my cards and check the performance later to see how it measures up if you'd like, but I am also pretty sure your CPU is holding you back at 1440p , question is how much, a higher oc could help things.

Average is 68 fps with everythng all the way up, TAA AA and motion blur off @ 1440. Lowest dip was 50 and highest spike was 90. This was on the benchmark. That would be a cool reference for me to have if you did check that for me. What CPU are you running for comparison?

Again, it's super playable at those rates but I just wonder where the ceiling is and where it should be. If it's not using up 100% of the horsepower on either CPU or GPU then what's holding it up. Gonna try to push the OC a little harder but every time I've tried it gets super unstable even with more voltage.

Heres a video that you might compare your frames. https://youtu.be/nlWg1h9WEZE
I would highly recommend you get something like an 8700K as i would never use an FX with TitanXP

[Ad Hominem]

Escrito originalmente por Agnes Washington:

Escrito originalmente por Ad Hominem:

Average is 68 fps with everythng all the way up, TAA AA and motion blur off @ 1440. Lowest dip was 50 and highest spike was 90. This was on the benchmark. That would be a cool reference for me to have if you did check that for me. What CPU are you running for comparison?

Again, it's super playable at those rates but I just wonder where the ceiling is and where it should be. If it's not using up 100% of the horsepower on either CPU or GPU then what's holding it up. Gonna try to push the OC a little harder but every time I've tried it gets super unstable even with more voltage.

Heres a video that you might compare your frames. https://youtu.be/nlWg1h9WEZE
I would highly recommend you get something like an 8700K as i would never use an FX with TitanXP

So even for him, it's not utilizing 100% either. Does that mean his setup has a bottleneck too?

[John Doe]

No, a 8700K won't bottleneck a 1080 Ti, especially when overclocked.

When I used to play FC5, everytime it dropped down below 60 FPS, it was because of the GPU since I run 4k (one 1080 Ti).

Never had my CPU slow down the game on FC5, had the 7820X around 5ghz while playing it.

[Elon Mosque]

Escrito originalmente por Ad Hominem:

Escrito originalmente por Agnes Washington:

Heres a video that you might compare your frames. https://youtu.be/nlWg1h9WEZE
I would highly recommend you get something like an 8700K as i would never use an FX with TitanXP

So even for him, it's not utilizing 100% either. Does that mean his setup has a bottleneck too?

Well i cannot call that a "bottleneck" there will be a limiting part in every system even if you spend tons of money. However his GPU usage is over %90 almost all times which is good. You should be comparing that FPS with your results( maybe replay the same level to replicate results.) Then you will see how much of an difference it makes when it is used with an 8700K rather than an FX chip.

[vadim]

Escrito originalmente por Ad Hominem:

If it's not using up 100% of the horsepower on either CPU or GPU then what's holding it up. Gonna try to push the OC a little harder but every time I've tried it gets super unstable even with more voltage.

Don't spend your time on this CPU. It is a pure trash nowadays. And always been, tbh.
What is your GPU load in the game?

[Monk]

Escrito originalmente por Ad Hominem:

Escrito originalmente por Monk:

What FPS are you getting OP? I can disable one of my cards and check the performance later to see how it measures up if you'd like, but I am also pretty sure your CPU is holding you back at 1440p , question is how much, a higher oc could help things.

Average is 68 fps with everythng all the way up, TAA AA and motion blur off @ 1440. Lowest dip was 50 and highest spike was 90. This was on the benchmark. That would be a cool reference for me to have if you did check that for me. What CPU are you running for comparison?

Again, it's super playable at those rates but I just wonder where the ceiling is and where it should be. If it's not using up 100% of the horsepower on either CPU or GPU then what's holding it up. Gonna try to push the OC a little harder but every time I've tried it gets super unstable even with more voltage.

just did the benchmark test for you, disabled one of my 1080ti's and got the following results minimum 87fps (one single dip) average 109fps and maximum of 125fps

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1352537483

as you can see apart form one drop i maintained over 100fps, so i would say your cpu is holding you back quite a lot, ran it at the same settings as you did.

edit.
updated with sli test for comparison
minimum 103fps average 129fps maximum 157fps, sli, totally worth it , £740 (well more with blocks) for 20 extra fps heh

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1352550013

[ugafan]

Escrito originalmente por Ad Hominem:

If it's not using up 100% of the horsepower on either CPU or GPU then what's holding it up.

gpu utilization could show 100% and you can still have a cpu bottleneck.

the bottom line is the fx 8350 is holding you back. upgrade to an 8700k if you want to get the most out of your gpu.

[PepuroniPeetsa]

Your CPU is bottlenecking the hell out of that Titan.

[Monk]

Escrito originalmente por Net Neutrality:

Your CPU is bottlenecking the hell out of that Titan.

Yeah, it's basically costing him 40fps, he's not really getting any better performance than he would of with a 1070, and depending how it's clocked, the titan Xp is faster than a 1080ti, so could be worse.

[John Doe]

Don't forget that there are two Titan XPs though. The older one, which performs slightly worse than a 1080 Ti. Then the newer one, that outperform the 1080 Ti slightly. Not that it matters on this topic, all that matters is his CPU bottlenecking the crap out of his GPU.

I'd also say yeah, while there isn't much point in SLi for 1440p 60HZ, you might want the second GPU if your aim is 165HZ or 4k.

[Kaihekoa]

Why buy $1200 graphics card and use it with a 6 year-old CPU that cost $200 on release?

[Monk]

Escrito originalmente por Kai:

Why buy $1200 graphics card and use it with a 6 year-old CPU that cost $200 on release?

Someone who wanted to show the forums what a bottleneck really is ?

Without being a bit mean to the OP, everyone can make mistakes and can missunderstand their hardware performance, given they can afford a Titan, here's hoping they can take this as a learning experience and pull the rest of their kit up to date and spec to match it as I'd like to think anyone with a Titan can afford to make an upgrade if needed (which it is).

[John Doe]

I think he simply didn't understand that the FX was going to hold back his Titan's performance big time.

Similar to people buying high end GPUs with P4s back in like 2006. Thinking that if they buy an expensive graphics card, their performance would improve even with a CPU known to be mediocre.

Nowadays people understand more when it comes to these things with the talk about bottlenecks and stuff.

[Ad Hominem]

Escrito originalmente por Kai:

Why buy $1200 graphics card and use it with a 6 year-old CPU that cost $200 on release?

I've had the 8350 for some time, and before the Titan I had a Radeon R9 390x which is a little more in it's league. I didn't just purchase the 8350 recently. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear about that. The Titan was the latest upgrade. I really only wanted a 1080ti but since they're 200 dollars more expensive than a Titan (because of how the bitcoin market has hit the hardware market) and the only place you can get them for MSRP is perpetually sold out. I waited for months trying to snipe one and finally just ponied up for the Titan when I saw one in stock on the Nvidia website.

On that note I did look into getting a new CPU at the same time, but I would also need a new motherboard and ram to match since I need a new socket type and don't own DDR4 ram currently. And since my wife just gave birth to our first child 2 weeks ago, I'm going to have to be more strategic with this kind of spending than before. I'll probably just try to overclock the piss out of it in the mean time, but so far I havent been able to get it stable.

I also must have some fundamental misunderstanding about how these bottlenecks work. I didn't think I needed a new CPU because it wasn't being used at 100% load at any time. I accept that the CPU is limiting me, but I just don't understand the reason why.